Apply consistent project template across OCI

[caniszczyk]

@crosbymichael we should apply this across OCI projects once it's finalized

[crosbymichael]

@opencontainers/tdc-maintainers

Any comments/concerns on these docs because we need consistent rules across projects around contributing and how the maintainer system works so that it is explicit.

We had previous comments on the individual PRs but no one transferred their concerns here when asked. Please take a look.

[wking]

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 02:00:09PM -0700, Michael Crosby wrote:

We had previous comments on the individual PRs but no one
transferred their concerns here when asked.

How should the concerns be transferred? I'm happy to open PRs
addressing my comments from opencontainers/runtime-tools#56.

[crosbymichael]

@wking you can open PRs but remember that these documents should apply across all OCI projects. Be conservative with the changes you want to make because these are the rules that have already applied for years and have worked well scaling the projects. We are just trying to make them generally applicable across all the projects.

[cyphar]

I think that the way we have a "Conventions" section in CONTRIBUTING.md, but nobody appears to follow the whole "name the branch after the issue you're fixing" is something we should fix. There's also other stylistic things there that shouldn't super important to mention ("commits short messages should be capitalized" -- I don't agree).

IMO we should spend a bit of time removing cruft from there (which nobody is following anyway, but it confuses future contributors).

[wking]

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 04:55:41PM -0700, Aleksa Sarai wrote:

I think that the way we have a "Conventions" section in
CONTRIBUTING.md, but nobody appears to follow the whole "name the
branch after the issue you're fixing" is something we should fix.

Covered by #6?

[hqhq]

I agree we can consist these docs and apply them to all OCI projects, they just need to be well reviewed and discussed.

[vbatts]

largely this SGTM. Could we imagine a future scenario where a project starts with these templates but then deviates? (silly example, but like requiring 3 LGTMs)

[crosbymichael]

@vbatts We could but I think that is probably like a last resort. There are a lot of benefits to keep consistency across the projects as it is helpful for the maintainers and contributors especially since all they projects are related to one another and have many of the same people working on them.

[vbatts]

understood.

On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 4:12 PM Michael Crosby notifications@github.com
wrote:

@vbatts https://github.com/vbatts We could but I think that is probably
like a last resort. There are a lot of benefits to keep consistency across
the projects as it is helpful for the maintainers and contributors
especially since all they projects are related to one another and have many
of the same people working on them.

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#4 (comment)

[caniszczyk]

@crosbymichael I think we have enough consensus here that we should apply this across all OCI projects, I think we have runtime-spec and runc covered, I'll file a request for image-spec

[vishh]

@caniszczyk This template is not valid for OCI yet. It has language about a Chief Maintainer which is not relevant to OCI. I can post a PR to address parts of the template that are not relevant to the OCI projects.
Is there a deadline before which this template needs to be finalized?

[caniszczyk]

@vishh no strong deadline, would be nice to have in place before v1.0

Feel free to send a PR in